The Gender and Sexuality Commission (GASC) is an ASUCD commission. Its purpose is to actively promote awareness of gender and sexuality issues, as well as sexual assault, through outreach efforts, publicity drives, and special projects. Additionally, GASC works with campus resources pertaining to gender, sexuality, and sexual assault awareness education in order to improve these respective efforts on campus. Furthermore, GASC assists in the organization and coordination of educational programs concerning gender, sexuality, sexual assault and sexual harassment. Programs include: Generation Sex Week, attending the Western Regional LGBT Conference, supporting student groups/campus events through co-sponsorships, educational workshops, panels, and keynote speakers. GASC also reviews and makes recommendations to the ASUCD Senate and relevant ASUCD Commissions on gender, sexuality, and sexual assault programs at UC Davis and throughout the UC system.

GASC can offer collaboration/informational resources on projects, campaigns, educational programs and is able to budget money, write bills to senate, & co-sponsor. This 11-member voting body has legislative power and ability to mobilize students on issues pertaining to/but not limited to: domestic violence, gender equality, queer issues, sex positivity, minority groups, and awareness.

On June 6th 1991, the ASUCD Executive Council passed Council Bill #66 which created the Sexual Assault Awareness Committee (SAAC) to "ensure student input on policies concerning sexual assault and to increase knowledge of sexual assault issues". The committee, according to the bill, met on the second Wednesday of every month. In 1998, SAAC became the Gender and Sexuality Committee in order to expand its work and to be more "inclusive of different genders and sexualities". In Winter 2002, a Constitutional Amendment, authored by former LEAD Senator and ASUCD Vice President Dan Beaman, created the ASUCD Gender and Sexuality Commission.

In 1998, SAAC became the Gender and Sexuality Committee in order to expand its work and to be more "inclusive of different genders and sexualities".

In Winter 2002, a Constitutional Amendment, authored by former LEAD Senator and ASUCD Vice President Dan Beaman, created the ASUCD Gender and Sexuality Commission.

Meetings

Meetings are open to the public, and it is highly encouraged that students attend meetings if they are interested in helping with, or just getting a grasp on present and future GASC projects throughout the year.

Events

All GASC and Generation Sex Week events are free and open to all regardless of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, religion, political affiliation, ideology, class etc. ASUCD and GASC welcome ALL students to come and participate in the events. Come celebrate, learn and have a great time!

Their events do operate under voluntary Safe Zone guidelines and they ask that the attendees respect this request. A Safe Zone is an agreement to be respectful of all participants, presenters and attendees of an event. It also includes being non-judgmental and unpresumptuous about all who are involved. While the term Safe Zone may not be a "legal" term, it does coincide with the UC Davis Principles of Community. Some feel that there is no legal obligation, and therefore no moral obligation, to adhere to safe zone rules.

Occasionally people mention personal examples when discussing programs, including their own sex toy use.

In 2004, Ian Watson wrote an opinion in the aggie about why he thinks the workshop is "[an] idea so bad [it is] almost humorous." This article prompted several people to write to the California Aggie in defense of the "Sex Toy Workshop".

He based his opinion on what little he saw as he "poked [his] head in for a while". Had he stayed for the entire workshop, he would have learned that since butt plugs should always have a wide stopper to keep it from going too far in, he should have put something around his neck to keep his head from getting wedged so far up his ass. —MarieHuynh paraphrasing RevChad

Positive Regards for the Commission

I appreciate and enjoy what this commission does. GASC is very important today, in a time where high AIDS, other STD and teen pregnancy rates directly correlate to a lack of sex education. Furthermore, this year's commissioners have fostered creative dialogues among the various campus groups...where else could you find a Jew, a Muslim, and BrentLaabs talking about sex? This is also a time when parts of our society are finally recognizing the marginalization and bigotry towards homosexual and transgender inviduals who do not fall into traditional views of sexuality. By fostering a sexuality dialgoue they work to expand societal acceptance of the LGBTI community. Funding GASC only takes about $0.01 out of my pocket, well here is $0.02. JimSchwab

Comments:

The critiques I have read basically take the approach of "This shouldn't be done, so this shouldn't be talked about." As opposed to the approach "Since this is done, we should talk about it". The former is the same logic that the DARE program uses - which is why they don't talk about actually doing drugs, just that you ought not to do them. The consequences of actually doing them are not discussed. Similarly, conservatives don't like AIDS awareness or homosexual discussion in general, because once again, they think people ought not be doing them so it would be best not to talk about them. Any logical person that isn't bent up on emotional prejudices can see just where this approach would lead to - and it's not down a bright and cheery path. Call me a liberal, but anyone that criticizes events like the ones that GASC put on are just playing a game with themselfs of denying reality." - cjm

Exactly. I've heard people say it is a liberal event while it is aimed at education without politics being involved at all. I think the people who focus on GASC using student fees should see where else their student fees go to. Places like the Health Center that give educational sessions on birth control are funded with student fees. Places like the Womens' Center, the LGBTRC, and more are all funded, in part, by student fees. These places all have a goal of educating and improving the physical, mental, social, and sexual health of the students - not some liberal agenda. - Ro

I can understand the "against" point of view; the Health Center and Womens' Center are focused on health, safety and support. This is pretty much focused on "how to have kinky sex". That said, I support it... but because I support education and discussion of anything to adults. This seems to draw a crowd and is thus in demand... so was the Pixies concert last year. That all said, if I *didn't* think it was appropriate for adults to be educated on and discuss kinky sex, I would be upset about it. I think it's a healthy edge... there will be "edge" activities that some people don't want, and "over the edge" activities that the majority of people don't want. I could probably find a group of people willing to lecture on zooaphilia, but I think that would be "over the edge". Thus the line is drawn... when the majority of people involved want it gone, rather than a single person or minority. — jw

Your opinion of "kinky sex" is not the universal opinion (fortunately). I feel that using categories like this is just another form of discriminating based on age, gender, sexuality, ability, race, ect., holding everyone to the "norm" of "proper" sexuality. Keep in mind that your opinion of sexual norms is personal when you called GASC events "edgy" or "controversial" and remember that GASC is promoting a more inclusive campus that will not hold anyone to another person's norm. —AlisonT

The California Aggie (print edition) contained an article on 1/12/2005 talking about an alleged liberal named "Mason" filming Generation Sex Week events with their permission — which are so-called 'Safe Zones' in which individuals are encouraged to speak freely. GASC suspected the filming individual to be a conservative because of his persistence.

It is true that the individual known as "Mason" received permission from commissioners to film interviews, but he was misleading in the regard that he told commissioners that he was filming from a "liberal website" and was getting footage of "activism on campus". He was clearly not what he said himself to be after leaving several incriminating paper program evaluations stating it was a "waste of student money". He also did not receive full permission from the Sexuality panel participants or the participants of the open mic night.

You are operating under the assumption that I am legally required to obtain permission. I believe that the paper program evaluation said "You've been penetrated" as well. :)- M

Everything I learned about sex and masturbation, I learned on the internet for free (sort of serious, there are actually some very informative videos on porn sites about how to get a female to finish). Sort of dumb that these people get paid for something you can easily find online for free. —hankim

I'm not sure what side you're on here. Are you for or against Sex Weeks? If you're for them, then are you arguing that self awareness (in your case in the form of internet surfing) is important? If you're against them, are you arguing that we don't need them BECAUSE we have the internet, and thus shouldn't pay people to put these workshops on? In either case I'll let you know that the people putting on GenSex are not paid, and the people who are paid are not those who are telling us how to masturbate or what have you. Besides, I don't know anything about you, but I'll let you know that as a queer woman, it is nearly IMPOSSIBLE to find information on the web, or porn letting me know how to act or "get a female to finish." Most of the internet is crap and comes from the straight, male perspective, one which is generally biased and ill-informed when it comes to both women and queer people in general. Sorry for the rant-like quality of this comment, I meant no negativity towards you, just hoping for clarification :3 —AshleyMatson

So the people who come to talk about sex don't get paid and these events don't use student fees? I am against Sex Week in the same way I am against the ARC. I use the ARC's services but only because I am already forced to pay for it making it a huge waste of money to join a cheaper and better gym and I don't think it's fair that everyone should pay for a service that is not used. Yes, the majority of porn is for males (if not all) but sometimes people do upload instructional videos, they are just a bit harder to find, although I really don't mind browsing through all the other videos. My main point is that not every student should be forced to pay for services like this especially those who are more reserved when it comes to sex. And for getting a partner to finish, I learned from a variety of sources including what I found on the internet and discussions with my partner. —hankim

Well at least we can agree on the fact that not everyone should have to pay for the things that they don't use. As a final thought, how about this—The amount of money GASC gets for Gen Sex week is about 1k (and that comes out of their yearly budget), and when you compare that to the 15k that goes specifically to those t-shirts they throw out to the AggiePack at football games (we're not even talking about everything else, JUST the shirts), so that a small handful of our large student population can feel cool...it's a small price to pay. —AshleyMatson

Oh, and another side note, did you know that ASUCD spends more than 1k on CANDY alone? It's actually quite laughable. THAT is where our money goes. :)

While it's cool that this information is available online, many people aren't going to actively seek out this kind of information through such a medium. Stuff like workshops about consent are the kind of things that are appropriate for Generation Sex Week. Quite a lot of college-aged people are pretty unclear on what consensual sex means. Why WOULDN'T you want that kind of information readily available? I might be knowledgeable and read lots of stuff online about stuff like the links between sexual shaming and youth suicides (especially among queer youth), but not everyone is like me and goes online all the time to read articles and blogs about such topics. Sex education is important for everyone. While you may not personally attend these things, it benefits the entire community. Also, the amount of money spent on GASC's programs at UC Davis probably amounts to like... 10 cents a person. I think the benefits of realistic sex education, awareness, etc. far outweighs that of telling people that learning about sex should just be a private concern, has no place in public education, and is essentially a waste of money. That only leads to more shame around sex, which can be very unhealthy— physically and mentally. —JenniferGiang

Han never said "learning about sex should just be a private concern, has no place in public education, and is essentially a waste of money". I believe his main complaint is that all students are compelled to pay for a course of study that not all students need, desire or even agree with. I would say that having public performances of Beowulf in Old English would benefit students (I certainly learn more about our language and the nature of communication and oral traditions when I get a chance to attend a performance). Should students be forced to pay for something only a fraction will attend? The vast majority of the student body communicates orally, so, like sex and gender, it is a nearly universal human trait. Should a student whose parents immersed hir in sexual studies and exposed them to a wide variety of situations and educational events be forced to pay? Should a student who disagrees with many sexual practices because they are practicing Muslim or Catholic be forced to pay? I believe that is the core issue Han is taking — the non-opt-out nature of a non-core curriculum student activity that does not benefit all students for many reasons. I'm only reiterating the stance because you kind of skipped over his concerns and made value judgement (re: weighing benefits, assuming shame is universally seen as a bad thing, etc). Your answer, while passionate, didn't really address his position because you are assuming he holds certain values which he may not. There are probably other answers which might, but I've already put words in Han's mouth (hopefully toward clarifying his position rather than twisting it into a tangent). At the most basic level, you pretty much need to explain why you are taking money from him so that you can use it for something you believe in, but that he apparently has no interest in supporting. —Evan 'JabberWokky' Edwards